Applications of Lung Cancer MDT Combined with PBL + CBL Model in the Clinical Teaching
-
摘要:
目的 探讨肺癌MDT联合CBL+PBL模式教学的应用效果。 方法 将2020年5月至2021年5月进行胸外科住院医师规范化培训的医师随机分为对照组与实验组，各24人，对照组采用传统讲授模式LBL教学法，实验组采用MDT联合PBL+CBL教学模式。 结果 对照组较实验组学员理论成绩、病例分析及临床技能操作评分比较：差异有统计学意义[（80.039±5.744±5.744）分vs （84.001±6.474）分，P < 0.05；（77.708±5.599）分vs （82.250±6.081）分，P < 0.05；（76.041±5.568）分vs （84.208±6.199）分，P < 0.05 ]。问卷调查显示：实验组较对照组在在教学满意度方面差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）；同样在提高自学能力、学习兴趣、理解能力、实践能力、思维能力等方面的差异也均有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。 结论 在针对肺癌的临床教学中，MDT联合PBL+CBL模式在实际教学活动中取得了良好效果。 Abstract:Objective To explore the application effect of the lung cancer MDT combined with CBL+PBL model teaching. Methods Physicians who received standardized training of thoracic surgery resident physicians from May 2020 to May 2021 were randomly divided into the control group and the experimental group, with 24 people in each group. The control group adopted the traditional teaching mode LBL teaching method, and the experimental group adopted MDT combined with PBL + CBL teaching mode. Results Compared with the experimental group, the control group had the statistically significant differences in theoretical scores, case analysis and clinical skill manipulation scores [（80.039±5.744） points vs （84.001±6.474） points, P < 0.05; （77.708±5.599） points vs. （82.250±6.081） points, P < 0.05; （76.041±5.568） points vs （84.208±6.199） points, P < 0.05]. The results of the questionnaire survey showed that the experimental group had a statistically significant difference in the teaching satisfaction compared with the control group （P < 0.05）; the differences in the improvement of self-study ability, learning interest, comprehension ability, practical ability, thinking ability, etc. were also significant. There was a statistical significance （P < 0.05）. Conclusion In the teaching of lung cancer, MDT combined with PBL+CBL model has achieved good results in the actual teaching activities. -
Key words:
- Lung cancer /
- MDT /
- PBL /
- CBL /
- Teaching mode
-
表 1 对照组与实验组的基本信息差异性分析（
$ \bar x \pm s $ ）Table 1. The difference analysis of basic information between the control group and the experimental group （
$ \bar x \pm s $ ）组别 n 年龄（岁） 性别（男/女） 入科前考试成绩（分） 对照组 24 25.542 ± 1.888 10/14 80.208 ± 6.447 实验组 24 25.500 ± 2.085 14/10 81.958 ± 6.003 t/χ2 0.073 1.333 −0.973 P 0.942 0.248 0.336 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 对照组与实验组的理论知识、病例分析、技能操作得分比较[（
$ \bar x \pm s $ ），分]Table 2. Comparison of theoretical knowledge，case analysis and skill operation scores between the control group and the experimental group [（
$ \bar x \pm s $ ），scores]组别 n 理论成绩 病例分析 技能操作 对照组 24 80.039 ± 5.744 77.708 ± 5.599 76.041 ± 5.568 实验组 24 84.001 ± 6.474 82.250 ± 6.081 84.208 ± 6.199 t −2.24 −2.692 −4.801 P 0.03* 0.01* < 0.001* *P < 0.05。
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 对照组与实验组的满意度比较 [n（%）]
Table 3. Comparison of satisfaction between the control group and the experimental group [n（%）]
组别 n 非常满意 满意 不满意 满意度 χ2 P 对照组 24 5（20.83） 7（29.17） 12（50.00） 12（50.00） 6.500 0.039* 实验组 24 11（45.83） 9（37.50） 4（16.67） 20（83.33） *P < 0.05。
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 对照组与实验组综合素质考评得分比较[（
$ \bar x \pm s $ ），分]Table 4. Comparison of comprehensive quality assessment scores between the control group and the experimental group [（
$ \bar x \pm s $ ），scores]组别 对照组（n = 24） 实验组（n = 24） t P 提高自学能力 7.665 ± 0.556 8.554 ± 0.552 5.557 < 0.001* 提高学习兴趣 7.941 ± 0.419 9.069 ± 0.344 10.173 < 0.001* 知识理解深度 7.903 ± 0.493 8.672 ± 0.479 5.472 < 0.001* 提高实践能力 8.105 ± 0.681 9.080 ± 0.275 7.821 < 0.001* 综合思维能力 7.989 ± 0.776 8.864 ± 0.416 4.866 < 0.001* *P < 0.05。
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] Arnold Melina,Rutherford Mark J,Bardot Aude,et al. Progress in cancer survival,mortality,and incidence in seven high-income countries 1995-2014(ICBP SURVMARK-2):A population-based study[J]. Lancet Oncol,2019,20(11):1493-1505. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30456-5 [2] 张雷,唐震,梁冰,等. CBL、PBL联合模拟培训教学模式在胸心外科住院医师规范化培训教学中的应用[J]. 中华全科医学,2017,15(7):1233-1235. [3] 张莹,徐军,陈峻江,等. 关于五年制高等医学院校临床课程改革的思考与实践[J]. 辽宁医学院学报(社会科学版),2015,13(1):38-40. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-0416.2015.01.012 [4] Stone Emily,Rankin Nicole,Kerr Stephen,et al. Does presentation at multidisciplinary team meetings improve lung cancer survival? Findings from a consecutive cohort study.[J]. Lung Cancer,2018,124(10):199-204. [5] Ricadat Élise,Schwering Karl-Leo,Fradkin Sophie,et al. Adolescents and young adults with cancer:How multidisciplinary health care teams adapt their practices to better meet their specific needs.[J]. Psychooncology,2019,28(7):1576-1582. doi: 10.1002/pon.5135 [6] Kedia Satish K,Ward Kenneth D,Collins Andy C,et al. "All boats will rise":Physicians' perspectives on multidisciplinary lung cancer care in a community-based hospital setting.[J]. Support Care Cancer,2020,28(4):1765-1773. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-04950-7 [7] 向润,李强. 肺癌"一体化诊疗、全程管理"模式的发展现状与思考——基于四川省肿瘤医院肺癌MDT团队经验[J]. 中国肺癌杂志,2020,23(4):211-215. [8] 姜久仰,张铁娃,廖飞,等. MDT模式下PBL教学法在胸外科教学中的研究[J]. 继续医学教育,2021,35(8):17-18. [9] 刘彦琦,陈平,马铭涵. MDT模式下PBL教学法在研究生培养实践中的应用[J]. 内蒙古医科大学学报,2021,43(S1):15-18. [10] Chong Kin Liam,Yong Sheng Liam,Mau Ern Poh,et al. Accuracy of lung cancer staging in the multidisciplinary team setting[J]. Transl Lung Cancer Res,2020,9(4):1654-1666. [11] Kidane Biniam,Toyooka Shinichi,Yasufuku Kazuhiro. MDT lung cancer care:Input from the Surgical Oncologist.[J]. Respirology,2015,20(7):1023-1033. doi: 10.1111/resp.12567 [12] Liu Hongbing,Song Yong. MDT is still important in the treatment of early stage lung cancer[J]. J Thorac Dis,2018,10(Suppl33):S3984-S3985. [13] 汪庚明,孙谦,周燕,等. CBL、PBL联合MDT教学模式在肿瘤放疗科临床规培医师教学中的应用[J]. 沈阳医学院学报,2017,19(3):298-300. [14] 李宏亮,孙军霞,乔岩,等. CBL、PBL联合MDT教学模式在肿瘤放疗科临床教学中的应用[J]. 临床医药文献电子杂志,2019,6(82):177-178. [15] Khachfe Hussein H,Rahal Zahraa,Sammouri Julie,et al. Cancer in Lebanon:A review of incidence rates from 2008 to 2015 and projections till 2025.[J]. South Asian J Cancer,2020,9(3):147-152. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1721291 [16] Cho Kenneth K,Marjadi Brahm,Langendyk Vicki,et al. Medical student changes in self-regulated learning during the transition to the clinical environment.[J]. BMC Med Educ,2017,17(1):59. doi: 10.1186/s12909-017-0902-7 [17] Prabhakar Charles N,Fong Kwun M,Peake Michael D,et al. The effectiveness of lung cancer MDT and the role of respiratory physicians.[J]. Respirology,2015,20(6):884-888. doi: 10.1111/resp.12520 [18] Bellamy David,Peake Mick,Williams Andrea. The role of primary care as part of the multidisciplinary team(MDT)in the management of lung cancer:The "Dream MDT" report - new guidance from the UK Lung Cancer Coalition.[J]. Prim Care Respir J,2013,22(1):3-4. doi: 10.4104/pcrj.2013.00007 [19] Hoinville Linda,Taylor Cath,Zasada Magda,et al. Improving the effectiveness of cancer multidisciplinary team meetings:Analysis of a national survey of MDT members' opinions about streamlining patient discussions.[J]. BMJ Open Qual,2019,8(2):e000631. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2019-000631 [20] Lavender Verna. Finding our voice in the MDT.[J]. Br J Nurs,2017,26(4):S3. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2017.26.4.S3 [21] Zhong Wenzhao. Chinses expert consensus on the multidisciplinary team diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer[J]. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi,2020,42(10):817-828. [22] 沈彤,刘成军,刘少德,等. CBL+MDT模式在医学生临床教学、见习中的应用[J]. 中国卫生产业,2017,14(11):19-20. [23] Franceschini Davide,Bruni Alessio,Borghetti Paolo,et al. Is multidisciplinary management possible in the treatment of lung cancer? A report from three Italian meetings[J]. Medical Microbiology and Immunology,2020,125(2):214-219. [24] 狄建忠,李昆,任庆贵,等. 多学科团队诊疗模式在临床应用的研究进展[J]. 中国医院,2016,20(1):79-80. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-0592.2016.01.029 -
